Washblog

---

INTEGRATING AVIATION INTO INTERMODAL TRANSPORTATION PLANNING

---

Aviation is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions and other pollutants and its contribution relative to that of other modes of transportation is rising. (2) According to Dr. Verhagen, aviation is largely neglected in intermodal systems planning and, in a number of ways, held to lower standards of public accountability. Fully integrating aviation into intermodal transportation planning would capture transportation efficiencies across all the modes. It would spark new avenues of technological development. It would allow for the discovery of hidden costs and assumptions. It would put all our transportation options on the table at one time allowing us to make more intelligent systems-level decisions. It would bring considerable ecological benefits at a time of ecological vulnerability. The growth in the aviation industry that appears to be touted as an unmitigated boon (3) appears in a different light when it is considered that this sector may be out of balance in relation to the other transportation sectors -- perhaps placing them, and all of us living beings as well, at a competitive disadvantage.

---

A CASCADE LEGACY: FRAGMENTED TRANSPORTATION POLICY AND PLANNING

---

Policy and planning fragmentation is perhaps the central transportation challenge for our region.  From the recent Regional Transportation Commission Final Report commissioned by Governor Gregoire:

"The absence of a unified system for governing transportation has created a patchwork quilt of agencies that cooperate to a large degree but ultimately compete to get local or modal projects funded and built."

The Roads and Transit proposal now on our ballot addresses this fragmentation head on.   However, it shares a feature that characterizes even the most advanced intermodal transportation planning: an exclusive, or nearly exclusive, focus on surface modes of transport.

From today's perspective: in a region that depends heavily on the aviation industry for its economic well-being, with our history of defeating big-vision transportation measures, and with Proposition One balancing between victory and defeat, Dr. Verhagen's thesis that regions should approach an even more comprehensive level of intermodalism -- one that fully integrates aviation, scales it down relative to other modes, and holds it more accountable --  well, that may seem a bit quixotic.

But Dr. Verhagen is inspirational at the big-vision pep-talk.  He quotes Johann Goethe: "Boldness has genius, magic and power in it."  He quotes Washington's own William D. Ruckelshaus:

"Can we move nations and people in the direction of sustainability? Such a move would be a modification of society comparable in scale only to two other changes: The Agricultural Revolution of the late Neolithic, and the Industrial Revolution of the past two centuries. These revolutions were gradual, spontaneous, and largely unconscious. This one will have to be a fully conscious operation, guided by the foresight that science can provide. If we actually do it, the undertaking will be absolutely unique in humanity's stay on earth."

Business and government will not change unless citizens demand it, Verhagen says.  He suggests a process for organizing and carrying out this demand that envisions working with business and government as well as challenging them and holding them to account. I see it as a proposal for assertive activism -- a persistent strategic demand for ethical and sustainable practices.

Washington State does have a modestly-funded mandate to integrate some aviation planning into multimodal policies.   This requirement is seen in the Washington Transportation Plan 2007-2026.  But we may not be meeting even that modest level of integration.  WashDot's recent Multimodal Concurrency Study, for example, appears to contain no mention of aviation.

Federal policies -- which have greater power than state and regional laws to mandate and fund integrated intermodal transportation -- also appear to accord slight attention to aviation as part of the intermodal mix. The federal law that addresses transportation integration is the 2005 Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act. It appears to consider intermodal transportation as a matter only of surface transportation. SAFE, Inc., is working to have aviation included as an integral part of the intermodal mix in this federal law. (3)

It is not unreasonable to call for a more integrated intermodal transportation system. In fact, it could be said that we have been stuck in a transportation tangle in part because our vision has been too small.  Neither is it inappropriate to pursue this on the regional as well as on the federal level. State and regional level innovation is often the spark for national action.

---

CHRISTOPHER CAIN INTRODUCES DR. VERHAGEN

---

 

---

DR. VERHAGEN'S PRESENTATION
Click here for a Powerpoint of Dr. Verhagen's presentation.
HTML version: Sustainability within a Generation for the Aviation Industry in the Cascadia Bioregion

---

I'm honored to be here, Dr. Verhagen said, at this gathering in support of sustainable aviation in Cascadia.  Many thanks to The Port Observer for inviting me.  When I think of aviation in Seattle, New York, the United States, and internationally, one word springs to mind: growth.

Everywhere, people are up in arms because there is runway expansion, growth in the number of flights, the number cargo planes taking off late at night.  We should understand these issues in the larger context of the international economic system.  If we don't, we can easily become discouraged because, no matter how hard we work, it will take decades to get where we need to go.  We are up against powerful international forces.  The growthism in our international economic system enriches the few, impoverishes the many, and endangers the planet. It can't get any worse than that.

The growth we see in aviation has hidden and unacceptable assumptions.  For example, our planning fails to distinguish differences between efficient and premium transportation. (6)  Social and ecological costs are not internalized but instead are pushed out to society.  We see this kind of thinking in relation to Paine Airport.  Little accounting is made of the costs associated with the airport expansion to the people who live nearby -- the disturbed sleep, the noise, the total impact on health.  An article in the September 19th Seattle Times, No Paine No Gain, gives us an example of this.

The imbalance of growth in the aviation sector is also supported by our unwarranted separation of policy and planning for the aviation sector and for surface transportation.  Intermodal transportation is a hot topic.  But it refers primarily to surface transportation.  They don't include air transport!  The Integrated Intermodal Transportation System (IITS) Initiative, of Sane Aviation for Everyone (SAFE, Inc.), proposes a 15-year, $300 billion push to achieve a truly integrated transportation system. (5)

---

SUSTAINABLE AVIATION IN CASCADIA: A CITIZEN PERSPECTIVE AND PLAN OF ACTION

---

How to fight expansionism and get to a sustainable aviation structure and process in the US and Cascadia within a generation

To develop a plan of action, it is necessary to start with values.  People say that theory is not practical.  But it is; it underlies most of what we do. Government and business do not want to change their underlying values.  They will make these changes only if citizens force them to.  There is a history of the concept of sustainability in the United States.  In the early 1970s, sustainability was conceived in a more integrated way, as incorporating the ideas of limits to growth and social and ecological sustainability.  In the 1980s and 90s business and governments became involved and these concepts became more constricted to the ideas of sustainable growth and development.  We face a challenge now of moving back to a more integrated understanding of sustainability: contextual sustainability.  This includes four challenges: social justice; active nonviolence; participatory decision-making; and inter-generational equity.

Beneath these challenges are foundational values.  There is a need to shift from an anthropocentric to a biocentric understanding of our place in the world.  We must think also in terms of bioregionalism.  And we must understand that we are part of the cosmos, our physical structure is made of the stuff of "star dust".  We are universe beings, as well as earth beings.

The concepts of contextual sustainability are in accordance with what we find in The Earth Charter, which is a document that is as significant in the 21st century as the Magna Carta was in the 13th century and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in 1948.

It is important that, as citizens, we try to come to an agreement on our world view before getting the specifics of a plan of action.

Action on eight levels
Dr. Verhagen outlined proposals for aviation sustainability on eight levels: ethical, political, legal, ecological, economic, media, educational, and military. These proposals appear in detail in Sustainability within a Generation for the Aviation Industry in the Cascadia Bioregion.  Here are selections:

• Jointly develop for your region a contextual sustainability framework with a vision in accordance with the Earth Charter.
• Create an Integrated Intermodal Transportation System Initiative (IITSI) for your region.  Citizens Aviation Watch, US has such an initiative in the planning phases.  (5)

  An IISTI would integrate air transportation with an efficient intermodal surface transportation system that includes an expanded and efficient rail system (mostly for freight), and a national modern coach network. Short-haul air flights would be replaced by fast, not necessarily, high speed trains or maglev.  Preference would be given to the less energy-intensive and less polluting surface modes of transportation. Costs for implementing IITSI would approach $300 billion, an order of investment known to drive economic revitalization and technological development.

• Rejuvenate the Pacific Northwest Rail Corridor. (7) It is important to start pushing this again in the Northwest.  The Mineta Institute issued a study in 2005 that summarizes where this stands: High Speed Rail Projects in the United States: Elements for Success.  This corridor would allow the trucks that travel on I-5 to move on trains instead and I-5 then can become part of an efficient network for cars and coaches.    Politicians and business have great difficulty in pushing these improvements unless there is enough popular pressure.  I'm hearing instead there are proposals for a new 183-mile long highway through rural Washington.  Crazy! (8)
• Work to demand that social and ecological costs of aviation transportation are internalized, not shifted onto society but considered as part of the cost of aviation.  The cost of air travel needs to be 30% higher to reflect the costs that are now being externalized.
• Consider civil and military aviation together.  Nitrogen oxides fumes emitted by highflying military aircraft exert 30 times the impact on the climate as the same fumes from industrial processes on the ground.
• Prepare to stop the National Airspace Redesign Program. (9) We don't need more planes to go to the supermarket.  These air taxis are an increasing factor in congestion, forcing the big airplanes to wait while they clear out.  There is a "5th alternative" that the industry is not considering: "Doing more with less."
• Beware of the sustainable aviation discourse by governments and industry that looks reasonable but is a means of avoiding fundamental change.  For example, Sustainable Aviation in Great Britain is backed by oil companies, government, and airlines.
• Connect sustainable aviation and climate change to the 2008 elections
• Continue to pressure for the SEA-TAC airport's good noise abatement program by demanding that airport communities receive Part 150 funds for soundproofing their homes and not only their schools and hospitals.
• On legal issues, have a strategy and get assistance/consultation with those from expertise in the arena.

The Citizen has a Right and Responsibility to Demand Change
As citizens, it's not our choice to demand change, it's our right and responsibility.  We should not be begging policymakers to do the right thing. We must demand that they do the right thing. This is a matter of justice.  It is a matter of distributional justice, which refers to the equitable sharing of costs and benefits.  It is a matter of procedural justice, which means that there must be accountability and that decision making must be participatory.

Given the climate crisis, aviation is going to be pushed to change drastically. There are a number of estimates as to how much aviation is contributing to greenhouse gas emissions. It is clear that, while other transportation sectors are reducing their contribution, that of aviation is increasing. (2) Doing more with less will come to pass because there is no other option. It is not so much a question of slowing the rate growth of this industry; it is a question of reducing its size. You can imagine that this is not a popular view.

But people, faced with the kind of iconic photos such as the shot of the earth showing the wildfires in California will start to question things. The evidence of extreme climate change is growing stronger. You can think of this in terms of a farmer in Central Africa starving and people in Bangladesh drowning. In this perspective, when you are making a decision whether or not to fly, it becomes a question: do you want to kill people?  Do you want to drown people? There are quite a lot of hopeful signs. People are really starting to see there's a crisis and responding to this with action. Humanity's ethical systems are developing. If we can provide value frameworks to move us to sustainable systems, this will be a unique occurrence in our stay on earth.

---

PANELIST PRESENTATIONS
This section should be read as my understanding of the panelists' presentations.  It is not a complete account and may contain errors.

---

FRED FELLEMAN, FRIENDS OF THE EARTH

I'm a marine biologist, so I see things from that perspective. I'm focused on "dockside", so I'm not going to speak much on the topic of aviation.

We now have a much more receptive Port Commission to work with on environmental issues than we have had previously. The leadership of the two commissioners here today, Alec Fisken and John Creighton, should not be ignored. We are also fortunate here in the Northwest, to be represented by Jay Inslee and Maria Cantwell, who are backing the goals of the New Apollo Alliance.

I just got back from Bunkerworld 2007 (an annual marine fuel sustainability conference). Bunker is the main fuel that ships burn. It's basically a waste product. There's a joke out there: "you pay for this stuff?".

There is no mode of transportation more efficient per ton than shipping. But the largest engines are burning the dirtiest fuel. When a big ship comes to dock at the Port of Seattle it can produce as much sulfur dioxide per hour as 350,000 cars. At the Port of Seattle, cruise ships, as a condition of lease, are now required to use either low-sulfur diesel fuel (1.5% sulfur or less) or or alternative hookups while at dockside. This will significantly reduce the impact of these ships on the environment.

MARPOL Annex VI has not been ratified by the US.  (Last March, H.R. 802, which would amend the Maritime Pollution Prevention Act of 2007 to Prevent Pollution from Ships to implement MARPOL Annex VI, passed the US House. It's now in the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation.) Senator Cantwell is a member of the committee that will decide whether to ratify it.

The United States needs to be part of Annex VI. If we don't start getting serious, responding to the urgency here, significant cuts in per-ship emissions will be eclipsed by the rate of growth in the industry.  One take-home idea from today: call Senator Cantwell and ask her to support Annex VI.

A second take-home idea: get a copy of the Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy. The next draft is due to come out November 15. The shipping industry offers great potential to reduce pollution. Forty percent of all installed power on ships is expected to be replaced in the next 10 years or so. We need to have our regulatory framework in place.

HEATHER TRIM, PEOPLE FOR PUGET SOUND

There is a huge disconnect between the Port commission, which is publicly accountable, and the culture of fear among port staff. The new CEO, Tay Yoshitani, has a lot of potential to change this.  There needs to be a top-to-bottom reassessment of how the Port does sustainability -- from composting to the taxis that deadhead at the Port. (11)

The Port itself is a community leader and has a lot more room to be a sustainability leader. Here are some action items:

1. Airplane emissions. We're told: 'We don't control this. It's the FAA and Boeing.' Why not have the Port look at working with Boeing in a partnership on airplane emissions?
2. De-icing chemicals. These are required on plane wings.  But the ingredients are proprietary.  We don't even know what's in there.  These chemicals go through sewage into the Sound and we can bet that they're not all cleaned up before they get into that water.  Let's find out what's in there.
3. Transit needs more funding and support. The best ways to help the environment are in our transportation choices.
4. How do big changes happen in society?  We are at the cusp of an energy revolution.  We can't get people to change by saying: "Decrease your quality of life."  We need technology development.  We need government to support technological development.  The Port can help promote this.

DEBI WAGNER, US CITIZENS AVIATION WATCH

I became involved because I was personally affected by aviation emissions in 1993.

Nine to fifteen percent of greenhouse gas emissions come from aviation and this sector is greatly increasing its capacity without adequate advances in efficiency and emission reductions. Engines are getting bigger and hotter.  The public is not getting the whole story.  All other modes of transportation have increased their emissions by 3% since the 1970s.  Aviation has increased its emissions by 133%. This is unacceptable for society as a whole.  Everyone else is forced to cut their emissions.  It's unfair and it's unbalanced that aviation is not held to the same standards.

What are the solutions?  Each of us needs to change our mindset on how we are living.  We need to consider when we travel, can we take other modes?  The IITS Initiative is important to look at.  We should consider whether we can take some of the money we plan to invest into expanding SeaTac and put it into other investments.  Can we create a panel of experts in science, economics, and transportation to look at the options for our region and do a study on the best course for our region?

How can we turn the mindset of people from expansion to sustainability?  It's difficult.  We've made foolish investments and those aren't easy to undo. But our children, our resources, our health and wellbeing depend on our ability to make better decisions regarding how we are going to move people and cargo in this region.

---

NOTES

---

1. Dr. Verhagen is President of Sane Aviation for Everyone (SAFE, Inc.), a coalition of citizens' groups and individuals in the greater Metro New York region that was established in 1994. SAFE, Inc.'s place in the growing international network of organizations working for sustainable aviation helps provide an overview of this movement's network. It is a founding member of Citizens Aviation Watch (CAW, Inc.), a national group. It is also a member of the International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation, which has consultative status at the Committee for Aviation Environmental Protection (CAEP) at the International Civil Aviation Organization, the UN agency charged with promoting understanding and security through cooperative aviation regulation."

   According to the European Federation for Transport and Environment, the International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation currently consists of Aviation Environment Federation (UK), Center for Clean Air Policy, (US) Coalition for Clean Air, (US) Dutch Society for Nature and Environment, Friends of the Earth-Europe, German League for Nature and Environment, GermanWatch, European Federation for Transport and Environment, World Wildlife Fund-US."

2. From The International Coalition for Sustainable Aviation in a 2003 position paper entitled, Aviation and its Impacts on the Global Atmosphere:

   "Currently representing 3,5% of total anthropogenic radiative forcing (this is as much as the total contribution of the UK to global warming), aviation's total human-induced climate change impact could represent as much as 15% by 2050 if no measures are taken to reduce these emissions, even after accounting for expected technological improvements, according to the IPCC Special Report on Aviation and the Global Atmosphere (adopted in April 1999)."

3. • Commercial Aircraft Design Characteristics -- Trends and Growth Projections, International Industry Working Group, R1, 5th Edition, 2007.  This document reports typical forecasts of revenue increases per passenger kilometer/mile at about 4% annually and 50% worldwide for cargo between 2003 and 2010.  Significant increases in airplane size -- at all design dimensions are predicted. Improvements in fuel efficiency and emissions are also predicted -- but those charts do not seem to indicate the metrics or context for those improvements.
   • Boeing's Current Market Outlook 2007 predicts that, between now and 2026, the world economy rise by 3.1%, the number of airplane passengers by 4.5%, and the amount of air travel by 5%.  The air cargo market is projected to grow 6.1% per year.  There is also predicted an easing of government regulation and a "liberalization" of markets.  28,600 new airplanes will be delivered over the next 20 years. These new airplanes will make up 80 percent of the 36,400 airplanes in service in 2026.
4. The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA, pronounced Ice-Tea) is a United States federal law that posed a major change to transportation planning and policy. It presented an overall intermodal approach to highway and transit funding with collaborative planning requirements, giving significant additional powers to metropolitan planning organizations. Signed into law in 1991, it expired in 1997. It was followed by the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21) and most recently in 2005, the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU).  All of these appear to focus on surface transportation nearly exclusively.  (This information is adapted from WIKI entry on ISTEA).

   SAFE, Inc is pushing for new legislation that integrates aviation into ISTEA, so that ISTEA would become ISATEA.

5. I understood Dr. Verhagen to mean premium transportation as being the more costly services, like air taxis, that may produce more profit for the airlines, but are less efficient in cost for society as a whole when considering factors such as pollution, high noise levels, and congestion in air travel.
6. The IITS Initiative, Dr. Verhagen wrote in a 11/2/07 to me, is in the conceptual stage. Its second draft will soon be completed. It is briefly described in Demand #2 of  Ten Sustainable Aviation Demands issued by SAFE, Inc.
7. High Speed Rail Projects in the United States: Elements for Success.  The PNW case study begins on page 69.  The 1991 Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) required, among other things, that the U.S. DOT identify potential high-speed rail corridors.  In 1992, the U.S. DOT identified the Pacific Northwest Rail Corridor (PNWRC) as one of five potential high-speed corridors eligible for federal funding. This designated corridor extends from Washington State south to Eugene, Oregon, and north to Vancouver, B.C., a total of 466 miles. Washington's legislature could have approved funding to capture federal funds and begin planning to develop the corridor. But instead it put the matter to the public in Referendum 51, which was defeated at the polls.  The Mineta report recounts how Washington political leadership brought the region close to developing this corridor -- before a number of factors scuttled it, including the hesitancy of the state legislature to take the political risks to use its authority to appropriate the needed funds; Tim Eyman's Initiative 695, which defunded WASHDOT by 40% just when its advocacy was needed; and various political dynamics, including a general anti-tax and anti-government sentiment, post-WTO political discouragement, and resentments between Seattle and suburban Washington. This study provides a clear connection between political engagement and civic trust -- healing the urban-rural divide and bringing back a sense of citizen participation and ownership in democracy a key element in improving our transportation infrastructure, maintaining the quality of life in the PNW, and addressing climate change.
8. Dr. Verhagen is probably referring here to the Washington Commerce Corridor, previously known as the proposed Highway I-605
9. For a description of the National Airspace Redesign Program, search on the term, "redesign" in the National Airspace System Capital Investment Plan: FY 2008-2012, Federal Aviation Administration. Generally, the program is described as one that "reduces limitations" on how airspace can be used in order to maximize efficiency:  "Airspace Redesign is the FAA initiative to improve the use of the nation's airspace, leverage new technologies, equipage, infrastructure and procedural development to maximize benefits and system efficiencies."
10. Clean air strategy for ground and water transport: Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy, draft, 5/07, Port of Seattle, Port of Tacoma, Vancouver Port Authority and in Port Innovation Workshop Final Report, 2007.
11. From the Mayor's Green Ribbon Commission Report on Climate Protection, Seattle, March 2006: "The City, the Port of Seattle, King County and taxi companies should agree on a better regional approach to regulating taxis to reduce the amount of 'deadheading.' When the agencies restrict taxi licenses to either deliver or pick up passengers from certain sites, such as the airport: one part of the round trip is completed without passengers."
12. The December, 2006 Regional Transportation Commission Final Report that was commissioned by Governor Gregoire specifies that the plan covers all modes of transportation in Washington, including aviation.
13. Two documents I came across in my reading for this piece offered intriguing insight into the broad range and scope of the kind of technical and social/political demands that I imagine would be involved in the integration of aviation planning and policy into the National Transportation System.

    The first is Washington State Representative Deb Eddy's 2004 Discovery Institute report, An Institutional Conundrum - A Simplified Overview Of Metropolitan Institutional Reform Applied To Transportation In The Puget Sound Region. Representative Eddy provides a survey of models for organizing governance structures overseeing transportation.  It's a fascinating read representing the integration of considerable recent research in the area.

    The other document is Jung-Ho Lewe's 2005 Ph.D. thesis, An Integrated Decision-Making Framework for Transportation Architectures: Application to Aviation Systems Design, which advocates for the development of technology and systems that would make personal air vehicle travel a routine reality.  On the surface,at least, this seems antithetical to Dr. Verhagen's proposals.  However, Jung-Ho Lewe provides a survey and categorization of existing technical models for transportation planning within the National Transportation System that seemed to me a very good broad-view look at current intermodal thinking.

14. SUSTAINABILITY WITHIN A GENERATION FOR THE AVIATION INDUSTRY IN THE CASCADIA BIOREGION:
    A Citizen Sustainable Aviation Perspective and Plan of Action
    October 25, 2007

    ---

    By Frans C. Verhagen, M. Div., M.I.A., Ph.D., Environmental/sustainability sociologist, President, metro New York coalition of sustainable aviation groups and of its national organization Citizen Aviation Watch, USA, Inc.; Sustainability Fellow, Green Institute, Washington, D.C.; Adjunct Associate Professor of Sustainable Aviation at Vaugh College; Director, Sustainability Research and Education at Earth and Peace Education Associates International.

    ---

    I am honored to have been invited to this Sustainable Cascadia Bioregion with its national reputation of being in the forefront on sustainability thinking and practice. I hope that my contribution about sustainable aviation in the overall theme of sustainability within a generation will be a useful one.

    INTRODUCTION
    The term that characterizes the regional, national and international aviation industry the best is the term GROWTH. Another similar term is EXPANSION which is characterized at growth at all costs.

    To understand this expansionistic syndrome we have to point to the growthism syndrome in the international economic system that enriches the few, impoverishes the many and endangers the planet. It is this larger context within which the citizen sustainable aviation movement has to see its efforts for sustainable aviation policies, programs and projects and for sustaining futures of people and planet.
    

    Another important cause of growthism in the aviation industry is the "predict and provide" approach where industry, particularly the larger airframe manufacturers such as Boeing and Airbus predict growth rates and where governments provide expanded capacity based upon those projections.

    This growthism syndrome and its associated expansionistic mindset is probably the best epitomized by the president and CEA of the ATA, the  American Air Transportation Association which represents 90% of the US airlines. Its weekly, of course free, newsletter ATA Smart Briefs  makes it very clear that any FAA or DOT regulation that restricts their operations in any way is solidly opposed. Its position is that airport capacity has to be expanded and, therefore, it solidly and joyously support the National Air Space Redesign Program of which we in the metro NY area are feeling the full impact and which will come to the Cascadia region in due time. Time does not permit me to read the September 27 letter to DOT Secretary Mary Peters by Mr. James May, the ATA president and CEO.

    In short his airlines "remain solidly opposed to congestion pricing as a solution to congestion and flight delays." It is a tax which, according to Mr. May,  DOT and FAA are not authorized to levy; it raises prices that certain classes cannot afford to pay and to top it all, he asserts that the flying public does not want any restrictions. The fight over the flight schedules at congested JFK during the last three months shows that the DOT and FAA finally are somewhat standing up to the airlines that are unwilling to compromise their scheduling during their peak hours of operations at JFK.

    Of course, the citizen sustainable aviation movement that represent airports such as JFK are not invited as part of the stakeholders' deliberations. We have been clamoring to keep the high density rule which would have prevented the present congestion and delays.

    This expansionistic mindset is also present in the Cascadia region, not only in the operators of its major airports and executives of Boeing, but also in the council members of  and consultants to the town of Paine. Their expansionistic mindsets also is evidenced in their arguments of jobs, economic development, etc. Thus, the  Op-Ed page article by Hans Toorens of the Seattle Times of September 19 clearly shows this expansionistic and growthism mindset when they are pushing their  proposed airport expansion in Paine UNDER the heading NO PAINE, NO GAIN

    The argument runs like this:

    "Air transportation has been developed and accepted by worldwide communities as one of the most efficient modes of transportation and infrastructure in support of economic growth, tourism and prosperity. Cities and regions implementing commercial-airline capabilities have historically enjoyed above-average economic and employment growth."

    Statements like this and the general discourse of an expansionistic aviation industry have to be countered by  squarely proposing the sustainable aviation perspective: air transportation is not the most efficient one, particularly not on short-haul distances of some 500 miles; it is, however, a premium mode of transportation which has to be matched with premium uses such as crossing an ocean; it surely is not the most efficient for short distances, because its complicated technology  is generally 4-10 more energy intensive than surface modes of transportation; it may create jobs but at what social and ecological costs, particularly in these troubled times of the climate crisis. The social and economic costs of the noise and air pollution are not counted and if they were as they should aviation per passenger mile will be far more  costly than an efficient intermodal surface network of trains, of coaches, inter-city rail etc.

    An enormous challenge for the citizen sustainable aviation movement in the Cascadia region is the presence of Boeing. It is one of the main actors in the expansion of  the industry, not only by its production of new planes such as the 787 Dreamliner,  but also by its earlier mentioned forecasting which leads the federal government to provide capacity, mostly at taxpayers dollars. Boeing is an essential part of the "predict and provide" mechanism that makes both the civil and military aviation industry expand, expand, and expand.

    Having very briefly sketched the context of an expansionistic  international, national and regional aviation industry which behaves as if there is no tomorrow  with an ever increasing emergency of the climate crisis, we now have to ask ourselves how this aviation industry can be forced to become sustainable within a generation in the Cascadia region, so that the industry can be fitted into David Suzuki's Sustainability within a Generation goal for the Cascadia region.

    I want to answer this important question during this Convergence 2007 by briefly describing first what a sustainable aviation mindset or perspective is and, secondly, by applying that perspective to the several dimensions of a regional sustainable aviation and sustainable transportation policy, program and projects. In the course of discussing these applications many of the demands that are part of the TEN SUSTAINABLE AVIATION DEMANDS will be touched upon. At the appropriate time I will refer to the number of the demand in your handout.

    My remarks can be divided into two main sections: the development of a sustainable aviation perspective and a plan of action for the Cascadia region. The plan of action spells out four major challenges and a large number of policies, programs and projects under the headings of eight dimensions or levels. They are in rank order: the moral, political, legal, ecological, economic, educational, media and military levels.

    THE SUSTAINABLE AVIATION PERSPECTIVE
    So, what is the sustainable aviation perspective that we, as citizens, have to develop and apply by pressuring the aviation industry and the different levels of politicians? Do we as citizens have to develop a different perspective from government and business? Why? Are we not all members of the same society and thus pursue the same goals? These are important  philosophical questions about which disagreement exists among members of citizen sustainable aviation movement. One major group believes in a reformist approach, while the other, proposed here, believes  in a transformational approach to aviation issues and dilemmas.

    In order to be assured of the correctness of transformational approach of contextual sustainability approach, let me place this approach in a historical context of the sustainability revolution.

    It was during the early seventies that in publications such as Limits to Growth--a frontal assault on the growthism syndrome by pointing to limits of various resources and services--the idea of sustainability was raised. Unlike its conception in the eighties, the seventies had an integrated view on sustainability. It was considered the integration of the  social, economic and ecological dimensions. In the nineties and presently sustainability is most often considered to be ecological sustainability. In the development of our sustainable aviation perspective we are enhancing the earlier, seventies conception of an integrated sustainability conception, called contextual sustainability.

    In this transformational view of a  sustainable aviation perspective four values stand out: Environmental sustainability; Economic efficiency or sustainability; accountability and equity. These four values are integrated in a framework called the contextual sustainability framework. Therefore, this framework integrates  environmental and economic sustainability in the context of social justice, intergenerational equity, active non-violence and participatory decision-making.

    Social justice here is considered to be both distributional and procedural justice. This means that benefits and burdens of aviation are fairly shared and that decisions are made with the input of all stakeholders. Another term for the latter type of social justice is participatory decision-making. These values are placed within the larger concentric circle of a biocentric approach, as described in the concepts of bioregionalism, cosmogenesis and biocentrism. The diagram on slide 6 shows the centrality of ecological integrity with its surrounding circles of values and foundational assumptions. A fuller description of this framework that to a great extent is based upon the integrated social and ecological values of the Earth Charter can be found at my organization's website www.globalepe.org and is published in Wenden 2004 "Educating for A Culture of Social and Ecological Peace."

    This contextual sustainability framework can be considered part of the vision of the integrated social and ecological values of the Earth Charter. This Charter as the same importance and significance as the Magna Carta for 13th  Century Britain, The Rights of Man and  Citizen for 18th Century France and as the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in the 21st Century for the whole of humanity. In other words the present 2000 Benchmark draft of the Earth Charter can start functioning as humanity's values base, given that it was produced across the continents and disciplines in a wide variety of methods of participatory decision-making. Its next phase may be an evolution into soft law that can be accepted by most governments and the United Nations.

    CASCADIA SUSTAINABLE AVIATION PLAN OF ACTION
    Nineteenth century American transcendentalist and Unitarian minister Ralph Waldo Emerson made a very astute observation about principles and methods. These words are very important to us who want to pursue sustainable aviation policies, programs and projects based upon the principles of ecological sustainability, accountability and equity as proposed in the contextual sustainability framework. He writes:

    "As to methods there may a billion and then some, but principles are few. The man who grasps principles can successfully select his own methods. The man, who tries methods, ignoring principles, is sure to have trouble."
    Ralph Waldo Emerson quoted in Edwards 2005: 11.

    What are the major activities that the citizen sustainable aviation movement has to engage in to push for this contextually sustainable vision? What are these activities, particularly as they apply to challenge of having Sustainable Cascadia achieve sustainability in a generation?

    The most important challenge of the citizen sustainable aviation movement in general and also in Cascadia is to develop a basic consensus on a vision of sustainable aviation. It is this difficult challenge of a unified vision on the national level that keeps many groups apart and dramatically reduces the impact of the US citizen sustainable aviation movement on both the US and international aviation industry and the US Congress. EARTHCHARTER

    The second most important challenge for the US citizen sustainable aviation movement is to build a strong alternative to the present aviation and transportation system in the US by marshalling its forces for the IITS Initiative.

    This Initiative entails a 15 year program to the tune of $300 billion that would integrate aviation into an efficient intermodal system. Since the Wright Brothers started to fly in 1907, aviation has remained a separate mode of transportation, with its own funding separate from the DOT surface transportation funding, a separate technical and planning department that is not part of the Mineta Transportation Institute, etc. etc. Though the DOT has an intermodal transportation office set up after the 1991 ISETEA legislation, it does not include integration of the air transportation mode.

    For the last ten years I have been working on using the landmark of the jet age at JFK, i.e. the Saarinen building for an International Visitors Center on Intermodalism. The project's steering committee represents the Who Is Who in Intermodalism in the USA. The same members will be invited together with new ones such as representatives of Reconnecting America to be part of this far larger project. It is also the intention to draw on the Intermodalism experts of the Netherlands and Scandinavia and other parts of the world and, possibly, inviting them to be part of an International IITS Advisory Committee.

    It is high time that aviation is to be integrated into the US transportation system. There are many reasons for us in the citizen sustainable aviation movement to push for the IITS Initiative.

    First, the Initiative would reduce the emissions of the aviation industry because of a reduction in operations. Less planes means less emissions. This ecological reason in these troubled times of the climate crisis is primary. A close second would be the economic reason.  An integrated intermodal transportation system in the US would be a boon to the economic system as a whole, because it would produce its goods and services on a higher energy efficiency level and thus saving money and increasing competition globally. Also the 15 year program would create many excellent jobs, starting with the feasibility studies to be carried out by regional University Transportation Centers, the building and upgrading of tracks, the strengthening of an efficient coach network for passenger travel, support of rail freight companies so that their tracks can be more efficiently used for freight and secondarily for passenger travel.

    Besides these ecological and economic benefits security, safety is other considerations. What it takes is a vision of serious sustainability thinking and practice and the political will to invest the needed $300 billion to be disbursed over five 3-year periods.

    What are the benefits and roles of the various parts of the aviation industry in this Initiative? They will, like the other modes of transportation, draw on the $300 billion to start planning and implementing the integration. Thus, for instance, they will be required to evaluate their air services in terms of their linkages with the various modes of transportation in the cities and towns of destination. They may consider investing in an efficient train network, not necessarily high speed trains, because the latter seem not to be as energy efficient as an efficient regular train. By supporting this Initiative, the aviation industry will revamp itself and shedding its old skin on its path to sustainability.

    The third most important challenge for the US citizen sustainable aviation movement is to have the industry pay for all its social and ecological costs. It is demand #9 in your handout. Ecological economists generally do not include the social costs of the industry, but focus on incorporating the environmental costs. This is a very important start on the way to full sustainability in the industry.

    The fourth most important challenge of the citizen sustainable aviation movement is demand #3: have the US Congress expressly include both the civil and military aviation in any climate crisis legislation. Among the civil aviation measures the difference between passenger and cargo travel has to be spelled out.
    

    In pursuing these four major challenges it is highly advisable for the citizen sustainable aviation movement to keep British journalist George Monbiot's argument about aviation in the forefront.

    Monbiot argues that aviation industry, government and civil society have to acknowledge the basic incompatibility of an expansionistic industry with the need to reduce its GHG emissions. Having demonstrated that his target of 90% reduction by 2030 is possible by showing actual numbers and measures in housing, shopping, the cement industry, he (Monbiot) comes to the conclusion that there is no techno-fix for a 90% reduction of GHGs by the aviation industry by 2030. He systematically reviews the possible rate of engine improvement, the use of alternative fuels--hydrogen fuelled airplanes would have 10 times the impact on climate that kerosene-fuelled planes do --improvements in airframe manufacture, etc. He finally comes to the colossal conclusion that:  "The growth in aviation and the need to address climate change cannot be reconciled. Given that the likely possible efficiencies are small and tend to counteract another or to be unacceptable for other reasons, a 90 per cent cut in emissions requires not only that growth stops, but that most of the planes which are flying today are grounded. I recognize that this will be not a popular message. But it is hard to see how a different conclusion could be extracted from the available evidence."(p. 182)

    Some observers believe that the aviation industry will the main industry that will have to buy carbon credits from other industries, thus raising its prices which would reduce flying.

    Once the US citizen sustainable aviation movement has engaged in forcing a unified vision, in fully developing the IITS Initiative with the assistance of their Congressional representatives, in forcing the industry to internalize its social and ecological costs and, finally, in having Congress spell out in detail the requirements for the industry in its climate crisis legislation, demand #1 of reining back the expansionistic syndrome will take care of itself.

    Let's now look in greater detail what these challenges mean for the citizen sustainable aviation movement in the Sustainable Cascadia Bioregion. We will look at these challenges by pointing to various possible policies, programs and projects, divided into a half dozen dimensions or levels of the local aviation industry.

    We will start with the two most important levels of ethics and politics. This prioritizing of the ethical and political dimensions may seem somewhat arbitrary or farfetched, because these dimensions, particularly the moral one, are generally not prioritized by the aviation industry and the government. By keeping the discussions on the technical, economic or even environmental levels, they escape the more fundamental challenge of having to change their mindsets, perspectives, values and have them become part of a political process that they want to dominate. After discussions of the challenges in those two dimensions, we will look at the second set of the ecological and economic dimensions, given their importance and their interconnectedness. Following these four dimensions, the legal, educational, media, and, yes, the military dimensions will be briefly discussed.

    PLAN OF ACTION ON THE MORAL LEVEL
    It is the right and responsibility of the citizen sustainable aviation movement to pressure the aviation industry and its associated government agencies to pursue sustainable aviation of the contextual type of sustainability.

    Let me list of series of actions that more illustrative than exhaustive.
    

    1. Insisting on an equal sharing of burdens and benefits according the parameters of distributional justice, e.g. in routings of planes, the soundproofing of residences near airports
    2. Insisting on procedural justice by having a fair participatory decision-making process in the spirit of "Acting Together for a Just World"--the theme of the Civicus World Assembly in Glasgow, medio June  2008
    3. Pursue accountability in the aviation governance by questioning the use of institutional arrangement such as public authority which are set up to avoid red tape, but in fact escape democratic control
    4. Try to get legislation passed for an Aviation Ombudsman, as long as the justified demands of the citizen sustainable aviation movement are not heard and important aviation issues fall through the cracks
    5. Teasing out in present industry policies, programs and projects the ethical implications of both distributional and procedural justice for all the stakeholders is not an easy task. An example how this is done in respect to the US Government's response to the global climate crisis is available in Donald Brown's American Heat. His Rock Ethics Institute at Pen State has identified 8 areas in the US response that have are ethically unacceptable or at least challenged.
    6. In the contested field of statistics on the industry's contribution to the climate crisis the citizen sustainable aviation movement has to questions methodologies that do not include the values of the contextual sustainability framework explained earlier.
    7. Given the substantial contribution of the civil and military aviation industry to the GHG emissions and their contribution to the climate crisis the US aviation industry is to be guided by the principles that the US Government have agreed to, but does not comply with such as article 3 of UN Framework Convention of Climate Change (UNFCCC) and principles 2 and 6 of the Rio Earth Summit . Among these principles is the polluter pays principle. Thus, the citizen sustainable aviation movement can put the aviation industry on the defensive by arguing that they are not acting according to international law. Perhaps the citizen sustainable aviation movement in the Sustainable Cascadia Bioregion or the national organization, Citizens Aviation Watch, USA, Inc., should consider suing the US DOT and the FAA on this moral matter.
    8. Determining base line data on aviation and transportation based upon an explicit Earth Charter values-driven planning and assessment framework  and include these data in a Cascadia version of the TEN SUSTAINABLE AVIATION DEMANDS
    9. Work with the Sightline organization and apply its sustainability values within the larger contextual sustainability framework and the vision of the Earth Charter
    10. other

     

    PLAN OF ACTION ON THE POLITICAL LEVEL

    1. Rejuvenate the Pacific Northwest Rail Corridor program, taking clues from the Mineta Transportation Center's study of high speed rail and convince British Columbia the benefits of joining the effort. Part of this plan would be seeking the collaboration of the three authors who wrote "Cascadia: Shared Visions and Strategic Alliances in a Cross-Border Region " and of Mark Roseland of SFU who is a specialist in sustainable communities development
    2. Attack expansionism of the NAR program that will come to the Pacific Northwest in due time. Start promoting the fifth alternative that SAFE, Inc has been promoting in the metro NY region: doing more with less alternative
    3. Push aviation to the political level and make it part of the 2008 elections. Write to the candidates and expand their horizons on the climate crisis by having the aviation industry included in their platforms.
    4. Create many opportunities for networking on the bioregional level among citizens in order to build a sustainable aviation political force
    5. Negotiate, or at least, enter into conversation with the aviation industry--there are attempts of sustainability thinking, though beware of the sustainable aviation discourse by governments and industry. Cf. Sustainable Development Forum in the UK
    6. Show businesses such as airlines and airports that it will be in their benefit to being part of sustainable communities development planning.
    7. Have university professors teach a course on sustainable aviation or have local colleges offer online course on sustainable aviation.
    8. Set up working groups and bring in government officials and business representatives using the Local Agenda 21 approach, perfected by www.ICLEI.org in its approach of sustainable communities development.
    9. Push local governments in the Sustainable Cascadia Bioregion  to start planning for the energy and climate uncertainties in ways suggested by the Post Carbon Institute's Guidebook written by Daniel Lerch
    10. other.

    PLAN OF ACTION ON THE ECOLOGICAL LEVEL

    1. Make the connections with the concern about the climate crisis and show its urgency for the aviation industry to do its part using the excellently illustrated and incisively written book by Paul Brown, entitled Global Warning. Last Chance for Change.
    2. Keep the emissions of the aviation industry before the public and politicians. It may be around 15% now and will be that amount certainly in 2008. While carbon emissions in some industries have come down a little, they have been rising in the aviation industry on account of its unwarranted and unethical growth. It is surely a significant contributant in the rising carbon levels. States Christopher Field, director of the Carnegie Institution's Department of Global Ecology in California: "Carbon dioxide is rising at a much faster rate than before. In the 1990s, CO2 emissions increased by about 1.3% per year. Since 2000, the growth rate has been 3.3% per year." He and his colleagues researchers calculate that global carbon-dioxide emissions were 35% higher in 2006 than in 1990."
    3. Demand that the local and state governments engage in air pollution monitoring, preferably taking the bubble around the airport as their focus
    4. Continue to improve the Sea-Tac noise abatement program that received honorary mention in the NRDC publication, Flying Off Course. Perhaps a comprehensive noise soundproofing program can be pursued and trying to get the same results as the people in the Minneapolis case. In the Metro NY are we are attempting to have City Council funding to do our own independent measurement to force the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey to engage in a Part 150 program.
    5. Question the FAA's a noise monitoring methodology that underestimates aircraft noise, particularly by not measuring low frequency noise that does the most damage to life and buildings
    6. Push the FAA to devise a new methodology of measuring noise and pollution of engines in use rather than only of new engines
    7. Network with organizations such as the British Public Policy Research which published "The Sky's the Limit: policies for sustainable aviation"; with the Center for Clean Air Policy where Jack Smidt published "Aircraft NOx: Analysis of New Certification Standard and Options for Introducing an Airport Bubble." Note that this organization operates on the principles of Dialogue, Insight, Solutions